Is this the "smoking gun"? Letter from Cohen stating Trump did not reimburse him for Stormy Daniels payment

[Faun]

I see, so you approve of Biden meddling in Ukraines prosecutorial affairs? Got it…

He didn't. There was no active investigation into Burisma when Shokin was kicked to the curb.

 

[j-mac]

You were wrong.

Got it?

So, you approve…Got it?

 

[j-mac]

He didn't. There was no active investigation into Burisma when Shokin was kicked to the curb.

Would the US stand for say China telling us to fire an Atty Gen, threatening to invade Taiwan if we didn’t?

I don’t think so…

 

[Faun]

You are too damned stupid to be believed.

Show me where it makes any reference to "all information", or stop asserting dumb crap...

That idiot is posting evidence to show exculpatory evidence must be provided to the defense when going to trial. Sadly, he's too stupid to comprehend Brady doesn't apply to grand juries; in which there is no defense other than shat prosecutors allow.

In 1992, in US v. Williams, the SCOTUS determined Brady is NOT applicable to grand juries. That left it open to states to decide for themselves. In New York, Brady is NOT applicable to grand juries. In some other states it is and in others it's not. It's not in NY. At the Federal level, it's not constitutionally required but the policy is to recognize Brady in grand juries to avoid appeals on such matters.

 

[The5thHorseman]

So, you approve…Got it?

You should thank me for the edification.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Would the US stand for say China telling us to fire an Atty Gen, threatening to invade Taiwan if we didn’t?

I don’t think so…

Admit you were wrong.

Then we can discuss the "nuances".

 

[The5thHorseman]

Would the US stand for say China telling us to fire an Atty Gen, threatening to invade Taiwan if we didn’t?

I don’t think so…

Who threatened to "invade"?

 

[struth]

"Seems"?

To whom, Ruby?

to anyone that has listened to all his different inconsistent stories

 

[The5thHorseman]

to anyone that has listened to all his different inconsistent stories

That's not you, is it?

You take your instructions from someone on the teevee...

 

[Couchpotato]

In NY? It becomes a felony if the misdemeanor was to cover up another crime. Statute of limitations on a felony is 5 years and the clock pauses while such suspect is out of NY.

Yes but the crime they are saying he's covering up is a campaign finance one. Essentially, they are claiming that the "hush money" was a campaign expense which he (Trump) paid out of pocket which would make it a campaign contribution which he didn't disclose. There are more than a couple issues with this theory IMO. 1. If this holds true you could make the argument that essentially any expenditure by a candidate could be classified as a campaign contribution, since you can tie essentially any expenditure to "currying favor with a particular constituency". Buy a dog? You're currying favor with pet owners. Buy a beer, alcoholics. Buy a house? Realtors. It's silly. 2. Do you believe that had Trump used actual campaign funds for this that the same DA wouldn't be making the case that it was a misuse of campaign funds for a personal issue? The law can't be a heads I win tails you lose proposition for the State.

 

[Faun]

Would the US stand for say China telling us to fire an Atty Gen, threatening to invade Taiwan if we didn’t?

I don’t think so…

Irrelevant. Poroshenko was under both international pressure to dump Shokin, local pressure to dump Shokin & the Rada pressure to dump Shokin. Long time friends with Shokin, Poroskenko resisted. It took the threat of losing a one billion dollar loan guarantee to convince him otherwise.

 

[Lesh]

So, if trump is not in control of the day to day operations of his business, and the business pays cohen…can that implicate trump directly? Since he likely didn’t authorize the payments? Would any potential crime be centered around the company and the executives who approved the payments?

He signed the check

 

[Faun]

Yes but the crime they are saying he's covering up is a campaign finance one. Essentially, they are claiming that the "hush money" was a campaign expense which he (Trump) paid out of pocket which would make it a campaign contribution which he didn't disclose. There are more than a couple issues with this theory IMO. 1. If this holds true you could make the argument that essentially any expenditure by a candidate could be classified as a campaign contribution, since you can tie essentially any expenditure to "currying favor with a particular constituency". Buy a dog? You're currying favor with pet owners. Buy a beer, alcoholics. Buy a house? Realtors. It's silly. 2. Do you believe that had Trump used actual campaign funds for this that the same DA wouldn't be making the case that it was a misuse of campaign funds for a personal issue? The law can't be a heads I win tails you lose proposition for the State.

LOL

That's quite a stretch.

Regardless, paying off porn stars Trump had sex with, about a month before an election, who were looking to go public with sordid details, is unshakably to protect his image as a candidate. To pretend otherwise is laughable. To attempt to equate that with buying a dog or a beer is utterly nonsensical.

 

[Faun]

He signed the check

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

 

[Couchpotato]

LOL

That's quite a stretch.

Regardless, paying off porn stars Trump had sex with, about a month before an election, who were looking to go public with sordid details, is unshakably to protect his image as a candidate. To pretend otherwise is laughable. To attempt to equate that with buying a dog or a beer is utterly nonsensical.

Not my stretch, the Manhattan DA's.

BTW you didnt answer the question about whether you think that same DA would have charged Trump with campaign finance laws had he used actual campaign money to do this.

 

[Faun]

Not my stretch, the Manhattan DA's.

BTW you didnt answer the question about whether you think that same DA would have charged Trump with campaign finance laws had he used actual campaign money to do this.

Oh? Post a link to the DA comparing paying off a former sex partner going public with her story ... with buying a dog or a beer.

As far as your question, since it appears the DA is going after Trump for concealing campaign expenses, I would say, no.

 

[struth]

That's not you, is it?

You take your instructions from someone on the teevee...

yes, i've heard all his different stories, plus I am aware he's already an admitted liar.

Here's Cohen saying he was never paid back for the money HE personally paid Stormy Daniels: Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s Longtime Lawyer, Says He Paid Stormy Daniels Out of His Own Pocket (Published 2018)

 

[The5thHorseman]

yes, i've heard all his different stories, plus I am aware he's already an admitted liar.

Here's Cohen saying he was never paid back for the money HE personally paid Stormy Daniels: Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s Longtime Lawyer, Says He Paid Stormy Daniels Out of His Own Pocket (Published 2018)

What reason would Cohen have to pay Stormy?

 

[struth]

What reason would Cohen have to pay Stormy?

I don't know....hard to know what was going on in his twisted mine.....maybe he figured he could get in on the extortion scam with Stormy and Michael Avanitti and make a little money himself by overbilling Trump

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Aw shoot, another smoking gun....